|
|
|
Firm News |
Largest Jury Verdict in S.F. History on Behalf of Bank CustomersThe Sturdevant Law Firm obtains the largest jury verdict in San Francisco history. Judge orders Bank of America to end illegal seizure of exempt Social Security funds and pay damages to victims.
Confirming the largest jury verdict issued in San Francisco history, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Anne Bouliane issued a final decision on Thursday, December 30, 2004 in Miller v. Bank of America, concluding that the bank's practice of seizing exempt funds from the Social Security direct deposit accounts of more than one million elderly and disabled customers was illegal, unfair and fraudulent. The decision directs the bank to end the practice immediately. It also awards victims of the practice an amount of damages which may exceed $1.5 billion, including more than $284 million in actual damages and $1,000.00 for each person from whom it improperly seized directly deposited Social Security funds. The injunctive relief portion of the decision is stayed pending appeal of the judgment by the bank.
Plaintiff Paul Miller and the Plaintiff Class were represented by James C. Sturdevant and Mark T. Johnson of The Sturdevant Law Firm and Thomas J. Brandi of The Brandi Law Firm, both in San Francisco. The judge's decision follows a jury verdict issued in February of this year, concluding that the bank's practice violated settled California law dating back thirty years and awarding both statutory and actual damages to the victims of the bank's practice. The decision found from the substantial evidence at trial that the bank made and continues to make representations to its customers that direct deposit of Social Security government benefits is safe, secure and that the funds are instantly available; that the Bank made repeated written mis-representations that it had a right to seize the exempt Social Security benefits to recover overdrafts and insufficient (NSF) fees it assessed against these accounts; and that between August 13, 1994 and December 31, 2003 and that the bank collected a total of $284,385,741 from these accounts to satisfy its claims. The final decision also approves the jury's award of damages of $1,000 per class member whose funds had been seized by the bank illegally to satisfy its claims.
The case was filed in August, 1998, after Paul Miller's direct deposit account at Bank of America had been repeatedly set off by the bank to satisfy a debt the bank itself created when it erroneously deposited funds to his account. The bank seized his exempt funds three times, even after it apologized and opened a new account to prevent its internal seizure practices from reoccurring. Ultimately, the bank turned Mr. Miller's account over for collection. After a five week jury trial, in February, 2004, the jury issued its special verdict finding that the bank had misrepresented to a class exceeding one million bank customers that it had the right to seize their exempt funds, which is a violation of California law. Based upon this finding, the jury awarded the class damages exceeding $75 million, plus $1,000 per class member whose exempt funds had been taken from a direct deposit account. The trial court then heard additional evidence and argument over a period of several months before reaching its decision on the non-jury claims.
Thomas J. Brandi, lead counsel at trial for the plaintiff class, hailed Judge Bouliane's final decision, which fully exposes in detail the venality of the bank's conduct and practices against some of the most vulnerable individuals in our society. "The Bank literally stole hundreds of millions of dollars from severely disabled and elderly Californians who rely on these governmental benefits simply to survive," he said.
| |
|
